Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />City of New Brighton <br />September 13, 1983 <br />Page Four <br /> <br />he felt that any home business that did not present <br />a health or safety hazard was okay with him, but that <br />the Planning Commission may have other thoughts. <br /> <br />Mrs. Doherty indicated that she had contacted other <br />surrounding communities that do allow this type of <br />business in the home and thought it was silly that <br />she would have to go across the line in order to open <br />her business. <br /> <br />Councilmember Benke asked the Director of Community <br />Development how many years it had been since the Home <br />Occupation Ordinance had been reviewed. <br /> <br />The Director of Community Development responded that <br />it had been on the books approximately fourteen years <br />without being reviewed. <br /> <br />The Director of Community Development reviewed <br />the staff report. <br /> <br />Mr. James Casserly of O'Connor and Hannan, was <br />present to answer questions regarding the <br />proposed resolution. He indicated that there <br />was a slight modification in the development <br />agreement in the Certificate of Completion because <br />the project was starting later. <br /> <br />Motion by Blomquist, seconded by Schmidt to waive <br />the reading and adopt a RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF <br />NEW BRIGHTON, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING <br />THE ISSUANCE OF $1,850,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL <br />AMOUNT CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON, MINNESOTA, COMMERCIAL <br />DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (NEW BRIGHTON VENTURE I <br />PROJECT), DATED AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1983, AND APPROVING <br />THE FORM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY <br />DOCUMENTS. <br /> <br />5 Ayes - 0 Nayes - motion carried <br /> <br />The Director of Community Development reviewed the <br />report regarding development proposals. <br /> <br />Brighton Gate-Mr. Charles Risdallwas present to <br />review preliminary site plans for a proposed <br />residential/office/restaurant development near <br />the Long Lake Road 1-694 interchange on both sides <br />of 10th Street N.W. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt stated this type of proposal, <br />in his opinion, warranted consideration from the <br />Council. He stated he felt the plan dealt with the <br />soil conditions in the area and was not a "piecemeal" <br />development. He stated he was pleased it was being <br /> <br />Final Resolution <br />Industrial Reven. <br />Bond Application <br />Winfield Develop. <br />Report #83-241 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION #83- <br />101 WINFIELD <br />DEVELOPMENT <br /> <br />Discussion of <br />Development <br />Proposals <br />Report #83-242 <br />